qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: Michael Gagnon <mgagnon1@gmu.edu>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Time complexity for self-modifying code
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 20:37:36 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200702082037.36905.paul@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <45CB81B5.9080405@gmu.edu>

On Thursday 08 February 2007 20:01, Michael Gagnon wrote:
> Hello.  I'm a student at George Mason University and I had a question
> regarding the time complexity of QEMU's algorithm for dealing with
> self-modifying code.
>
>  From looking at the QEMU Internals documentation
> (http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemu/qemu-tech.html), it seems that
> QEMU's method for handling self-modifying code might have different
> algorithmic efficiency classes for it's average case and worst case.  As
> in, on average I assume that QEMU emulates instructions at O(n)
> efficiency.  In the worst-case, might self-modifying code change the
> efficiency of QEMU to another order of efficiency, such as O(n^2)?  Any
> thoughts would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks!

Depends what your N is.

Worst case for SMC (Self Modifying Code) is modifying code in the same TB 
(Translation Block) as the store instruction. This kind of fault requires 
O(tb_size) time, so executing a TB (assuming every insn traps) takes 
O(tb_size ^2) time.  However the page boundaries impose a hard limit on the 
size of a TB. 

Thus for N < TARGET_PAGE_SIZE worst case total execution time is O(N^2), but 
for N > TARGET_PAGE_SIZE total execution time is still O(N).

For SMC the constant factor may be orders of magnitude larger than for regular 
code.

Paul

      reply	other threads:[~2007-02-08 20:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-02-08 20:01 [Qemu-devel] Time complexity for self-modifying code Michael Gagnon
2007-02-08 20:37 ` Paul Brook [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200702082037.36905.paul@codesourcery.com \
    --to=paul@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=mgagnon1@gmu.edu \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).